Administrative Process, Decisions, Motivation, Cons. St., III section, Judgment of 27 November 2018 n. 6711

The sentence of the court of first instance motivated in a perplexed manner and with dubious expressions must be annulled on appeal

The Section has clarified that an unconvincing motivation by the judicial body is also a non-convincing reason, incapable of expressing, that is, sufficiently – and such as to stand in any case at the jurisdictional level of the judge of the second degree – the concise explanation of the factual and legal reasons that support the contested decision (Article 88, paragraph 2, letter d), cpa).

The perplexing, dubitative motivation, expressed with amletic or hermetic formulas, can not satisfy that rigorous motivational burden that is imposed, to keep silent on the other, first of all by art. 111, paragraph 6, Cost.

The motivational process of the contested sentence should not reflect an unresolved and tortuous internal struggle of the judge who, just as such, must remain internal to the sphere of his own conviction, but express, with the clarity and conciseness due (Article 3, paragraph 2, CPA), the reasons that led him to overcome the doubt, on the level of reconstruction of the facts and the interpretation of the rules, and to reach the resolution of the dispute, enunciating the rule of the concrete case according to our legal system.

There is no rule of the concrete case – and this is, by definition, the judicial decision to constitute what is judged – which presents itself, already in its own formulation, perplexed, uncertain, periclitante, because this contradicts the very essence of the jurisdictional function, which must be clear, synthetic, according to its certainty and its intelligibility.

November 27, 2018

Source Administrative Justice